FAILDC#

[BethesdaWX]

Well maybe i should rephrase that, we have the biggest weenies who rarely get snow. At least in New England and NY they get some snow.

That makes it even worse, they get their 35" in 2009/10 and call it "epic screwage". For our lattitude I think our subforum is quite tolerable, relatively.

Even as a lurker I enjoyed reading the SNE subforum that winter. Sweet sweet irony.

[usedtobe]

I'd be pretty surprised if DCA records more than a few tenths of an inch. Even if they get in a period of moderate snow for 45 minutes it would probably be a T or 0.1". IAD is another story. They got 0.6" with the October storm. I think they probably surpass that but the bust potential is still high. It seems to me the model guidance has to be pretty wrong to get an extended period of heavy snow and 31-32 degrees such that several inches could fall even in the burbs. I like the CWG map. No reason to go any more bullish than that map.

Jason just posted the CWG accumulation map in my post. I like it, it's pretty much what I would have drawn if I was doing the map.

[ravensrule]

Jason just posted the CWG accumulation map in my post. I like it, it's pretty much what I would have drawn if I was doing the map.

Oh you mean you changed you ideas about agreeing with DT's map .

[Bob Chill]

Our subform is probably full of more realism than others. And, not too many ma weenies freak out at a moments notice. If anything, the ma subforum only ranks about a 5 on the weenometer imo.

I think having folks like wes around helps alot. Also, coastal and orh know exactly when to make an appearance.

Edit: I only mentioned wes in my post. I think all the ma red tag regulars and the long time non-met but well versed members are just excellent here. Really helps keep a lid on scewed up analysis and unrealistic expectations.

[mattie g]

i dunno if that's true.. read some of the other forums.

that said, snow lovers are fairly content to never learn anything year to year it seems.

In regards to the DC-Baltimore region, it's probably because we generally only have fantasies to look forward to. If we learn too much and accept the reality that this area sucks for snow, then we can't indulge in those fantasies. Otherwise we risk being jaded.

[BethesdaWX]

I'd be pretty surprised if DCA records more than a few tenths of an inch. Even if they get in a period of moderate snow for 45 minutes it would probably be a T or 0.1". IAD is another story. They got 0.6" with the October storm. I think they probably surpass that but the bust potential is still high. It seems to me the model guidance has to be pretty wrong to get an extended period of heavy snow and 31-32 degrees such that several inches could fall even in the burbs. I like the CWG map. No reason to go any more bullish than that map.

All it would really take is the shortwave coming in a tiny bit slower than progged to result in significant changes in accums over the peidmont. That has happened before [regarding shortwaves progged too fast], I believe, but can't remember it ever remember a R/S line hinging on it's development.

[MN Transplant]

Looks like the changeover on the 18z NAM is 4z around DCA. Back edge at that point is around Front Royal.

[usedtobe]

Oh you mean you changed you ideas about agreeing with DT's map .

lol, I liked DT's original map which I think is not too different from the CWG one.

[ravensrule]

Looks like the changeover on the 18z NAM is 4z around DCA. Back edge at that point is around Front Royal.

Not that it means much but wasn't the changeover at 5z on the 12z Nam?.

[ravensrule]

lol, I liked DT's original map which I think is not too different from the CWG one.

Yeah i know just teasing you, i will be very happy if i actually get 1 inch of accumulation with this.

[BethesdaWX]

18z NAM looks better to me than 12z unless I'm reading it wrong?

Edit: Yep.

[MN Transplant]

Not that it means much but wasn't the changeover at 5z on the 12z Nam?.

4-5z. Not too much difference.

[Scuddz]

Stronger, slightly faster, and warmer initially than 12z but looks pretty similar overall

[ravensrule]

4-5z. Not too much difference.

But i guess 1 hour could mean .3" more for us so that is a big deal considering i have spent 50 hours tracking this dud.

[Ian]

hpc pulled back west a bit on probs of 1" but more or less the same around the cities.

[mitchnick]

18z NAM looks better to me than 12z unless I'm readig it wrong? 850's crash sooner even with less QPF (still boatloads). Could just be faster but can't tell.

"should be" snow over us at 36 hrs, but I haven't seen the soundings

http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/NCOMAGWEB/appcontroller?prevPage=Model&MainPage=indexℑ=&page=Param&cycle=12%2F06%2F2011+18UTC&rname=SFC-LAYER+PARMS&pname=sim_radar&pdesc=&model=NAM&area=NAMER&cat=MODEL+GUIDANCE&fcast=036&areaDesc=North+America+-+US+Canada+and+northern+Mexico&prevArea=NAMER&currKey=model&returnToModel=&imageSize=L

[yoda]

hr 33-39 (03-09z QPF)

http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/GemPakTier/MagGemPakImages/nam/20111206/18/nam_namer_039_precip_p06.gif

[MN Transplant]

But i guess 1 hour could mean .3" more for us so that is a big deal considering i have spent 50 hours tracking this dud.

The back edge is a little faster too, so that kind of cancels it out. Not really any exciting changes.

[usedtobe]

Looks like the 850 low actually tracks north of us on the 18Z nam. That's never a good sign.

[MN Transplant]

"should be" snow over us at 36 hrs, but I haven't seen the soundings

http://mag.ncep.noaa...el=&imageSize=L

Below freezing to at least 975mb. It is snow at that point.

[BethesdaWX]

"should be" snow over us at 36 hrs, but I haven't seen the soundings

http://mag.ncep.noaa...el=&imageSize=L

haha actually it's much worse accum wise, but probably more in line with reality now. All we can hope for now is the shortwave slowing down a tad more than guidance suggests.

[ravensrule]

Looks like the 850 low actually tracks north of us on the 18Z nam. That's never a good sign.

You are killing me Wes, let me know when you are going fishing next. I want to come along just so i can jump off your boat and end my agony.

[mitchnick]

Looks like the 850 low actually tracks north of us on the 18Z nam. That's never a good sign.

you and that 850 low

why I ought to.........

[MN Transplant]

Looks like the 850 low actually tracks north of us on the 18Z nam. That's never a good sign.

[yoda]

Looks like the 850 low actually tracks north of us on the 18Z nam. That's never a good sign.

I think its just E of us at 33 -- http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/GemPakTier/MagGemPakImages/nam/20111206/18/nam_namer_033_850_temp_ht.gif

[Ian]

I think its just E of us at 33 -- http://mag.ncep.noaa...850_temp_ht.gif

after passing overhead

yoda!!!!!

[ravensrule]

How from that map can you tell exactly where the 850 low is tracking?. I know you look at that black circle that starts south of us and extends into PA but how do you figure out exactly where it is tracking. Thank you for your help

[MN Transplant]

How from that map can you tell exactly where the 850 low is tracking?. I know you look at that black circle that starts south of us and extends into PA but how do you figure out exactly where it is tracking. Thank you for your help

Easiest way is just to step forward and backward:

http://www.instantweathermaps.com/NAM-php/showmap-conusupper.php?run=2011120618&var=HGT&lev=850mb&hour=032

[ravensrule]

Easiest way is just to step forward and backward:

http://www.instantwe...=850mb&hour=032

Got it thank you very much.

[Bob Chill]

Ugh. 850 is not what we want to see at all. Even with a better organized cold air source to our north the track would be a problem. Maybe we'll get dryslotted so we get less rain before the 30 minutes of slush globs fall when the ull moves past.